About your Search

20100901
20100930
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14
may leave those lines as they do in canada because they cannot survive the line. that is what i can see happening. >> i think we need to think outside the box. we don't do that and nothing government. in my personal of view, i think the federal government may well be in the wrong business with regard to health care. one of the things we need to have a discussion and debate about is what level of universal coverage is appropriate, affordable, and sustainable over time. in my view, that is preventative wellness and catastrophic protection with an option to obtain more if you want. i think we need to think about how we can end up moving toward a system that is more appropriate, affordable, and sustainable while maintaining competition and the ultimate delivery to the private sector because right now the system we have now, we have made more promises than we will be able to deliver on. that is the simple truth. >> you see a lot of projections of future medicaid and medicare costs. it seems there should be a largererror bar because you know the formula. you don't know how medical technol
. it is unheard of in great britain or canada for any party to ever think about changing the law to keep its competition off the bell. and the britain anyone can get on about -- to keep them off the ballot in this country. in canada but it only takes 100 signatures. it does not occur to people in most countries that is legitimate for two parties to get together and keep competition off the ballot. host: for those who tried to keep the parties off the ballots, what is the main reasoning? guest: it depends on whether they are talking honestly or not. if you want an example of an honest comment, i was at a georgia state legislative hearing once and a legislator on the elections committee said, i don't want no damn libertarian running against me. i appreciated that. when the law came before judges, the judges will not say something like that. they constantly tell us we are in danger of overcrowded ballots that will cause the uer confusion. the truth is, we suffer from under-crowded ballots. i have been tracking state legislative candidacies for 20 years. every election year between 30% and 35% o
neighbors to the north, canada, those kinds of systems work less well. it is very hard for us to go to a sovereign nation and say abide by this cap we might do it with canada. we will never do it with mexico and we will not do it with places like china. please comment on recycling, when and how does it work and not work. what does it cost? we have fortunately heard this afternoon from the trash me man, my colleague van benjamin, who published a work on the myths of recycling. i will do my best to summarize him in very few words. when does it work? not very often. how does it work? not very well. what does it cost? a lot. pretty well summarizes everything there is to know about recycling. it works when -- back to my concluding remarks -- it works when it is profitable. so aluminum works pretty well because in fact it makes economic sense. how does it work? with private incentives of people saying, hey, it is worth something to me to recycle my aluminum cans. it does not work when we end up spending far more -- and i do not mean just in the more money because money is just a way of me
made as the canada. 4.5 million small businesses and individuals will be eligible to immediately write off more expenses. that may benefit ruth, who is opening another restaurant in alexandria, virginia. 2 million self-employed americans will be able to receive a new deduction for health insurance. we will be increasing the tax break for anyone looking to open up a business. that is a $10,000 deduction. it can help with discouraging startup costs. future prosperity depends on whether regreting an environment in which folks can take new ideas for products to market and generate new business. that is not just a challenge of government. it is a challenge that requires businesses, leaders, universities, and others across this country. the second thing this bill does is we are going to make more loans available to small business. right now, there is the waiting list for sba loans. these are people who are ready to hire or expand, who have been approved by their banks, who are waiting for this legislation to pass. when i sign this bill, their weight will be over. will be over.it [applause] v
states, but not exclusive of other population. we imagined it would look a bit like canada and the united states, france and germany, where people would be able to cross the border. the israelis could be able to shop in palestinian areas, palestinians coming over to the israeli side -- and it has been repeated recently -- palestinians are not opposed to jews living in a palestinian state. we recognize the jewish people have religious and historic ties that will be the palestinian state. there is no objection to the jews living in the palestinian state. are they going to live in there as a palestinian citizen, as israeli citizens, under what framework? this vision of two states with multi-ethnic population is moving back and forth, this has taken a beating since i was in negotiations. over the course of all the violence that has taken recently, specifically in israel, over two exclusive populations. i think there needs to be a conclusion in a two state solution that allows both jews and palestinians to have access to both countries. the more interaction there will be, the more peace will b
indian airlines flight was hijacked in canada are -- kandahar. if pakistan is the key to afghanistan come into holds the key to pakistan, but the bush administration i think was already predisposed to building up india as a kind of way to china and quickly realized also that india was going to be a very important player in the war on terror. said the bush administration launched this massive diplomatic exercise that culminated in the u.s. indian nuclear deal. if you look at the relationship from about 2005, it improves dramatically. in fact, the rhetoric about cross border infiltrations reduces a lot of positive things that happened until of course the 2008 mumbai attacks and that impetus is lost. whether the u.s. in india nuclear deal brought in essence to u.s. policy with respect to afghanistan, pakistan remains -- it is somewhat speculative. it is something i think has been on the minds of a lot of people thinking about weapon sales. can weapons salsa they provide the united states with some latitude when it comes to u.s. policy toward afghanistan and pakistan. this is particularly imp
at the general assembly held this fall in montreal, canada, where we hope to make our work towards strengthening international standards into an actual resolution of the international community through acio. i think it is also important to note that in addition to a.c.i.o. the airline industry's have been with us every step of the way. and we have collaborated closely with united states and international airline and trade associations. we have met with airline ceos. we have met with them shortly after christmas day to explain what security enhancements needed to go in place immediately, but what we were striving for in the following weeks. and i personally met with all of these leaders, and i have also met with heads of the international air travel association, and also sethe a.t.a., and they have voiced strong support for the international voice that we have begun and expressed, we hope, at this fall at the general assembly. i think it's true that it is clear that our potential for collaboration goes beyond counter-terrorism. the airline industry is the first line of defense against criminals o
companies using these, especially in canada. i was wondering, on the state legislative side, is there anything we can do as an industry to help them work in the state-to-state level with one voice versus going individually state to state to try to get regulations that are written? all the states and to be moving toward this, but that a written more in compliance with what the national regulations that are being proposed and actually being brought out? is there any way that we can help to work with the states on that? thank you. >> well, i am not as familiar with the exact regulations you're talking about so far as the technology and the school buses. but so far as, you know, working with state legislators, again, i give you the invitation to contact me and talk directly with me. ncsl, on a whole, does not develop model legislation for states to adopt because, you know, the one size does not fit all, and we want to make sure states have flexibility in the way they approach legislation in their state. but i would at least welcome a conversation with you if there's an opportuni
in 1996. in fact the european union and others, including canada, australia, norway, japan and south korea have now imposed their own sanctions. virtually every western energy company has now agreed to cease sales of refined petroleum to iran and refrain from investments in iran's energy sector. following the passage, most banks in the united arab emirates, an portrayeding partner, stopped money transfers to iran. press reports have indicated sanctions have cut in half exports with dubai. south korean sanctions have suspended the iran bank in seoul. the bank is a known facilitator of iran's proliferation activities and south korea is iran's fourth largest trading parter. the impact is significant. based on our discussion with the korean government. the banks's operations have been shut down for good. japan have recently announced sanctions that target iranian entities and individuals of proliferation concern, including iranian banks, the islamic revolutionary guard corps and the iranian shipping lines. these sanctions, along with the prohibition on the transfer of proliferation-sensitive d
the way over there to canada and france, and that green line, that's the united states. we're second only to japan in terms of corporate tax rates. now, it's pretty hard for me to see the logic of complaining about things being made overseas, when what we do with our tax policy is tax corporations so heavily that you create an incentive to chase production overseas. if you're a businessman, you're competing. you're competing with all these other countries and what you're going to have to do is be competitive or else people won't by your product. so for us in congress to complain about foreign imports and things, when we've got a corporate tax rate that's second highest in the world, is once again an example of democrat tax policy being completely at odds with the goal of a strong economy and lots of jobs. you can't keep taxing the creator of jobs without losing your jobs. i think it's straightforward. i'm trying to make it simple. because there's one example after the other that our policies just don't make sense. here's a chart that's done a little more colorful way, we compete with fran
, canada, australia have undergone very significant reorganizations in the way they have overseen, leased, regulated, enforced safety and environmental protection in the offshore environment. did you look before you made some of your own proposals? it is unfair to ask a cabinet officer to talk about how seriously you might have considered moving something outside your own agency but has that come up? as the administration been involved in making judgments about proposals made by the former secretary and others about the functions and revenue raising and that they do not belong in the same department with the regulatory enterprises? that is a long list and i will hope that we get through a big -- a good bit of it. i would invite you to respond to any or as much of it as we can get through. >> absolutely, let me just say that there is no question that you should not ask me. you should ask about things we have done and things we will do in the future. those are all good questions that u.s.. with respect to the cultural mms, there is a clear statement i made when i hired and appointed with th
, canada, japan, south korea, norway have all taken a similar the robust approach. under the leadership of those countries it is crucial that others who follow will now look to their precedent. there's a strong and growing international consensus to hold them accountable for their actions. meanwhile, the united states has taken several actions of our own this summer, as indicated, adding substantially to its sanctions program that was already the most rigorous in the world. since the adoption of 1929, we have targeted more than 50 additional entities. bank said, -- banks, irgc officers. we identified several which have names that obscure the affiliation thus aiding companies around the world. congress gave us another powerful tool by passing the comprehensive iran sanctions act. it forces a stark choice. if you conduct certain business with them, you cannot do business with the united states. it contains significant sanctions on companies that assist iran in acquiring refined petroleum products. and also requires the treasury to prohibit or impose strict provisions on any foreign bank t
. such as the sharp 225 study launching next month and studies in canada and europe. finally, wrapping up here, steps for harnessing technology, we have work to do, three big areas. one is to continue to support development of technology. i do think it can play a role to prevent distractions. these kinds of technology solutions need validation. we need research in passenger cars to figure out where they can deliver benefits, optimize those benefits and minimize any unintended consequences. secondly, we've got to make sure that as we introduce technologies, they continue to be integrated well, especially with the basic driver interface, and that will require shared guidelines across all manufactures, not just automakers and share test procedures. building hopefully on what the auto-- the alliance of automobile manufacturers has started and moving beyond that, perhaps, and finally, educating drivers to choose and use technology wisely because technology can only be a partner here. it requires a responsible driver. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. the federal government we recognize is one of limited
to keep his own job. as far as canada's goes in this country, the vast majority goes the vast majority have used -- pack as far as cannabis goes, the vast majority of us have used it. as far as afghanistan and opium, we saw on the news where our soldiers were guarding the poppy fields. we're using our tax dollars to guard the poppy fields. this is a joke. as far as the opium and cocaine, and do not know, that marijuana is not that bad. it should be legalized. i do not use it no more. it is not that big a deal. thank you. guest: 2 richard and all of the other callers, one of the great advantages of living in the american society is we can have this dialogue and you get to this dialogue and you get to speak your piece, but clearly i cannot change the laws and the united states. elected officials get paid to do that. as long as illegal and unlawful, something i believe is correct and we should not be making illegal, then we are duty bound to enforce the laws. respectfully, i would tell you to direct your comments to congress. host: what keeps you awake at night, what worries you the most
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14